subtypes of IEIs/INFps on this forum

[indigoroom]

[Rocky]

I'd say that Ishy falls more under the ethical-subtype (if there is such a thing.. I don't whole-heartedley agree with Gulenkos' subtype theory, even though there probably is something to subtypes).

[Creepy-]

Ethical subtype? I can see it but at the same time I can't I feel like I'm too detached, I guess.

I think I might be a "bipolar" INFp ( and , not mania and depression). This could be brain disorders at play!

edit: Then again, I suppose the ethical subtype describes everything I wish I wasn't

[Scrummy]

I'm not sure the subtype theory can actually account for the disparity we're talking about, but I actually do think Artemis, MaizeMedley, Chibi, and Kelly are in fact INFps. I mean nothing sexist by the following, but notice the make-up of how organized the members into the subtypes you'll notice that the two in the Fe category are actually straight (so far as we know) females. Ishy, , HarryBottom, and I aren't. I've been known to call Fe "embarassing" and recently we've gotten into discussion about how male INFps tend to suppress their Fe for fear of being labelled emotionally manipulative, wishy-washy, or any of the other less flattering connotations of this function. Just something interesting I've noticed.

[Creepy-]

I'm not sure the subtype theory can actually account for the disparity we're talking about, but I actually do think Artemis, MaizeMedley, Chibi, and Kelly are in fact INFps. I mean nothing sexist by the following, but notice the make-up of how organized the members into the subtypes you'll notice that the two in the Fe category are actually straight (so far as we know) females. Ishy, , HarryBottom, and I aren't. I've been known to call Fe "embarassing" and recently we've gotten into discussion about how male INFps tend to suppress their Fe for fear of being labelled emotionally manipulative, wishy-washy, or any of the other less flattering connotations of this function. Just something interesting I've noticed.

uh, aren't straight or aren't females?

[Creepy-]

I'm not masculine, am I?

I guess I don't have much confidence in my , and I detest being labelled cute on anyday ending with Y (aside from the occasional Wednesday).

I suppose I've also gone on the " is over-rated" rant more than once.

[Creepy-]

I'm not sure the subtype theory can actually account for the disparity we're talking about, but I actually do think Artemis, MaizeMedley, Chibi, and Kelly are in fact INFps. I mean nothing sexist by the following, but notice the make-up of how rganized the members into the subtypes you'll notice that the two in the Fe category are actually straight (so far as we know) females. Ishy, , HarryBottom, and I aren't. I've been known to call Fe "embarassing" and recently we've gotten into discussion about how male INFps tend to suppress their Fe for fear of being labelled emotionally manipulative, wishy-washy, or any of the other less flattering connotations of this function. Just something interesting I've noticed.

uh, aren't straight or aren't females?

Aren't straight females. I assume from Baby's post that , HarryBottom and himself are all straight males.

[Creepy-]

for a minute there i thought that he was saying that they weren't straight, since you are female.

[Joy]

Everyone knows that ishy is my lover. Where have you been?

[Scrummy]

Ah sorry, I meant Ishy was not a straight female. But that's probably besides the point... we could have just as easily observed a more general male/female division in original post. But Socionics seems to get rid of the gender barriers that have tainted personality theory, so I must just be talking out of my ass again. Sorry. Carry on.

[Joy]

yeah, this whole male/female division idea you had is irrating me

[Rocky]

Everyone knows that ishy is my lover. Where have you been?

Joy, I remember awhile ago you said that you were more attracted to females than males, but had never actually been with a female, and was thankful for that. Are you saying that you changed your mind?



(wow... really sorry for being an ass right now)

[Joy]

you're not being an ass other in that you're off topic, and... no, I have not changed my mind

[Creepy-]

Everyone knows that ishy is my lover. Where have you been?

Joy, I remember awhile ago you said that you were more attracted to females than males, but had never actually been with a female, and was thankful for that. Are you saying that you changed your mind?



(wow... really sorry for being an ass right now)

She crosses oceans every Saturday just to make sweet passionate love. *bleh*

edit: we're being mean to !

[Joy]

Everyone knows that ishy is my lover. Where have you been?

Joy, I remember awhile ago you said that you were more attracted to females than males, but had never actually been with a female, and was thankful for that. Are you saying that you changed your mind?



(wow... really sorry for being an ass right now)

She crosses oceans every Saturday just to make sweet passionate love. *bleh*

aahahhahaahahahahahahhaah I'll do anything for ishy!

[Joy]

back to the subject at hand...

I do think that the differences we're seeing among the INFps on the forum are indeed related to sub type.

[Creepy-]

I think we are definately noticing different subtypes.

On that note - I'm sure I'm not the same sub-type as maizemedley/etc. Even if I'm not the same subtype as /etc.

INFp - Logical subtype? That's stupid, I know. I relate to although he sometimes makes me feel like I must be a different type. I definately relate to Baby.

[Joy]

I think is just a more well rounded person. He is an INFp, but a mature one. With you, as much as I love you, it seems that you're still learning to truly accept yourself to some extent.

[Rocky]

INFp - Logical subtype? That's stupid, I know. I relate to although he sometimes makes me feel like I must be a different type. I definately relate to Baby.

I don't think it's stupid... I was thinking that there were more subtypes than just "Producing/Excepting" Like, maybe there are Ti-subtypes, Se-subtypes, etc...

[Forest-Dragon]

My personal opinion is that the difference between INFPs on the forum is probably due to a whole range of factors as diverse as age, experiences and gender. I don't think its as set in concrete as either one subtype or the other dependent on solely whether you're male or female, although that would probably have something to do with it via the old 'nurture' argument.

[Creepy-]

That could be true, Rocky.

INFp - subtype? What do the rest of you think?

[Joy]

My personal opinion is that the difference between INFPs on the forum is probably due to a whole range of factors as diverse as age, experiences and gender. I don't think its as set in concrete as either one subtype or the other dependent on solely whether you're male or female, although that would probably have something to do with it via the old 'nurture' argument.

DING DING DING DING!!! Give the lady her prize, we have a winner!

[Forest-Dragon]

Assuming that the 'prize' is not a sarcastic gesture, could I drop a really unsubtle hint in suggesting a present of VI from someone

[Creepy-]

My personal opinion is that the difference between INFPs on the forum is probably due to a whole range of factors as diverse as age, experiences and gender. I don't think its as set in concrete as either one subtype or the other dependent on solely whether you're male or female, although that would probably have something to do with it via the old 'nurture' argument.

That doesn't really explain the patterns, though. Like, why and Baby are alike, etc.

[Joy]

Assuming that the 'prize' is not a sarcastic gesture, could I drop a really unsubtle hint in suggesting a present of VI from someone

Sure, start a thread and post as many pics as you can. PM me is you need help figuring out how.

So... idea... is it possible that sub types are determined by environment?

[Scrummy]

My personal opinion is that the difference between INFPs on the forum is probably due to a whole range of factors as diverse as age, experiences and gender. I don't think its as set in concrete as either one subtype or the other dependent on solely whether you're male or female, although that would probably have something to do with it via the old 'nurture' argument.

Thank you for that point. I agree. This is something I think we forget in our spheres of thoerizing - and we have discussed in the past the web of events that causes type in the first place - among those factors are gender, age, circumstance, etc. However, I don't think Gulenko had intended subtype to be a cause so much as a result - just as "type" is a result of those factors. In this case, I think had intended for the subtype to be a representation of these differences, rather than the cause.

[maze]

However, I don't think Gulenko had intended subtype to be a cause so much as a result - just as "type" is a result of those factors. In this case, I think had intended for the subtype to be a representation of these differences, rather than the cause.

That's what I thought was doing as well, but I wasn't sure. Is that what you were doing ?


BTW, yes, it's true. I enjoy using Fe! It's fun, it's dramatic and it gets people to react. How they react is their business and it lets me know more about them.

[Creepy-pokeball]

To me, subtype seems to be a bias towards a preference. Where this comes from... Im guessing multiple causes if true. I think Baby has a valid point. The kind of summary of "this is what works for them."

[Gilly]

Nice titties, Baby. I didn't know you were a Cherokee wise-woman.

[Joy]

Okay, I've got it... picture a graph... on the left is one sub type and the right the other. At the top is healthy and mentally well, and at the bottom is...

Disorder Perspective

The personality disorder which is a pathological representation of the Dramatic personality type is the Histrionic Personality Disorder.

Basic belief: I need to impress. Thinking strategy Dramatics.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (American Psychiatric Association, 1994, pp. 657-658) describes Histrionic Personality Disorder as a pervasive pattern of excessive emotionality and attention seeking, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

* is uncomfortable in situations in which he or she is not the center of attention;
* interaction with others is often characterized by inappropriate sexually seductive or provocative behavior;
* displays rapidly shifting and shallow expression of emotions;
* consistently uses physical appearance to draw attention to self;
* has a style of speech that is excessively impressionistic and lacking in detail;
* shows self-dramatization, theatricality, and exaggerated expression of emotion;
* is suggestible, i.e., easily influenced by others or circumstances;
* considers relationships to be more intimate than they actually are.

Typical Beliefs

* I am an interesting, exciting person.
* In order to be happy I need other people to pay attention to me.
* Unless I entertain or impress people, I am nothing.
* If I don't keep others engaged with me, they won't like me.
* The way to get what I want is to dazzle or amuse people.
* If people don't respond very positively to me, they are rotten.
* It is awful for people to ignore me.
* I should be the center of attention.
* I don't have to bother to think things through—I can go by my "gut" feeling.
* If I entertain people, they will not notice my weaknesses.
* I cannot tolerate boredom.
* If I feel like doing something, I should go ahead and do it.
* People will pay attention only if I act in extreme ways.
* Feelings and intuition are much more important that rational thinking and planning.

Think this added dimension to the INFp continuum explains a lot.

[Scrummy]

My personal opinion is that the difference between INFPs on the forum is probably due to a whole range of factors as diverse as age, experiences and gender. I don't think its as set in concrete as either one subtype or the other dependent on solely whether you're male or female, although that would probably have something to do with it via the old 'nurture' argument.

That doesn't really explain the patterns, though. Like, why and Baby are alike, etc.

Well, we actually aren't that much alike. (Sorry , we all still love you. )

The Medieval mystic St. John of Ruysbroeck once said: "We behold what we are; we are what we behold." In other words, personality is nothing without action. I think a great bit of the discussion here is walking a fine line between the difference between personality itself, and "type." A person's personality will be more easily percieved (but not easily defined). A person's type however, is very difficult to grasp, especially through the filter of the internet.

I'm a bit reticent to express what I've observed in myself for fear of isolating either end of the equation, here. If I identify with any of Gulenko's descriptions, it is actually with the Fe subtype. I've been afraid for quite some time that I've been misrepresenting my type. I've seen my name get thrown around a lot in reference to being INFp, but I don't believe the way in which I present myself on this forum is representative of many (and certainly not most) INFps. Baldly put, I think when dealing with subjective types like INFps, we are not going to be able to come to a concrete subjective conclusion. We are seeing this in action, here.

Anyways, I just don't want to see type evolve into a sort of crutch - or catch-all, if you will - for all of the human condition, because that is neither what Jung intended nor is that a mindset conducive to healthy interaction. Socionics is merely a model for a limited aspect of that interaction, and the disparities we are seeing here are just the result of the multiplicities of human behavior. In other words, INFps come in all shapes, sizes, colors, creeds, what have you.

I don't blame for starting this thread at all, maizemedley, and I actually didn't intend to imply he had any sort of agenda. I will admit myself that at times I have wanted to dissociate myself from other INFps because they have exhibited behavior that I could not imagine myself engaging in. If that is the agenda you are referring to, it is definitely there, but it's only human. By that same token, I have also tried to "recruit" people who exhibited many behaviors I can't see myself engaging in as fellow INFps. Thus, it does work in the converse direction.

[indigoroom]

Labeling myself a subtype only hinders my growth.

Why? Sounds like you are good at putting handcuffs on yourself? Get over that.

I honestly think that too had co-existing motivations going on in his post. There was a need to sort out behaviours and attribute functions, but there was also a subtle inclination towards creating divisions between these INFp's and those INFp's. Jadae and Baby picked up on this subtle motivation as well. It is representative of clique behaviour, I think. Megan where are you? You're good at this stuff. She's always putting me on check...damn that woman.

Bullshit. Dont make up stuff just because you don't like me. My agenda is to learn something more about INFps and you can see I've started tons of topics concerning different forms/subtypes etc of INFps. You are being paranoid. Start another thread if you want to discuss that. Go accuse Aushra and Jung for putting you in the socion>beta q>INFp cliques.

Well, we actually aren't that much alike. (Sorry we all still love you. )

True. Yesterday we talked with Baby about our lives etc we pretty much don't have anything in common. So subtypes or whatever are there and that shit that everyone repeats about upbringing etc is there of course but still we are seeing patterns.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Anyways, I just don't want to see type evolve into a sort of crutch - or catch-all, if you will - for all of the human condition, because that is neither what Jung intended nor is that a mindset conducive to healthy interaction. Socionics is merely a model for a limited aspect of that interaction, and the disparities we are seeing here are just the result of the multiplicities of human behavior. In other words, INFps come in all shapes, sizes, colors, creeds, what have you.

I <3 your mind.

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

Erm, I read the descriptions that originally posted, and I can relate to "The Social Four" and "The Special Four". Can't say which one more than the other.

I can't say that I ever really feel competitive with other INFps, but I do get annoyed by them. And different ones annoy me in a different way. (being honest mode) Like Baby and Maize seem condecending to me. I've heard that more NT types come off as condecending and I can see that, but its much more potent in INFps. Another thing is that they pretend to know what they are talking about, and don't do it well. If you want to come off as a know-it-all, at least make sure you can back up all you say.

BTW-I am completely guilty of most of my critisism, so that doesn't need to be pointed out. I also can't back up my opinions with facts, I can only offer my observations, ideas and feelings based on reading different posts by different people.

My personal opinion is that the difference between INFPs on the forum is probably due to a whole range of factors as diverse as age, experiences and gender. I don't think its as set in concrete as either one subtype or the other dependent on solely whether you're male or female, although that would probably have something to do with it via the old 'nurture' argument.

I'm pretty sure I completely agree with this. I think the base of most of the INFp's on this site is the same, but due to age, maturity, and how we were treated growing up...we SEEM different. Some of us may have not gotten the "right" amount or type of nurturing that we needed, so we may reach out for attention more. OR, we may have gotten too much of what we needed, and don't have enough....er...modesty (for lack of a better word). There are countless possiblities. This is all obvious though. Another INFp trait...stateing the obvious.

Alright...time for my apologies for taking offence and/or talking about of my ass....oh WAIT!!!

[/quote]

[Scrummy]

I <3 your mind.

Aw, thanks. I <3 my mind, too. "Of all the things I've lost in this world, I miss my mind the most." - Ozzy Osbourne.

Like Baby and Maize seem condecending to me. I've heard that more NT types come off as condecending and I can see that, but its much more potent in INFps. Another thing is that they pretend to know what they are talking about, and don't do it well. If you want to come off as a know-it-all, at least make sure you can back up all you say.

Me? Condescending?? Naw, can't be! Well... I'll give you that I'm often pretty wordy. I'm not as formal in person, really. I just find written language the easiest way for me to express myself (besides music, actually). And yes, INFps do tend to talk out of their ass... but we're often very convincing at it.

[Scrummy]

Nice titties, Baby. I didn't know you were a Cherokee wise-woman.

I love that avatar. *kicks baby on the head, steals his avatar.*

She's a hippie. I've named her Esmeralda, and the baby is named Sympathy Hinders Individual Transcendence. He's in for some therapy...

[Rocky]

I can't say that I ever really feel competitive with other INFps, but I do get annoyed by them. And different ones annoy me in a different way. (being honest mode) Like Baby and Maize seem condecending to me. I've heard that more NT types come off as condecending and I can see that, but its much more potent in INFps. Another thing is that they pretend to know what they are talking about, and don't do it well. If you want to come off as a know-it-all, at least make sure you can back up all you say.

Umm... I was going to say something here, but for the sake of not sounding like an ass, and because she thinks I am attacking her or something, I'll hold back.

[Creepy-aurora_faerie]

Me? Condescending?? Naw, can't be! Well... I'll give you that I'm often pretty wordy. I'm not as formal in person, really. I just find written language the easiest way for me to express myself (besides music, actually). And yes, INFps do tend to talk out of their ass... but we're often very convincing at it.

Maybe because I'm INFp...I notice the ass-talk so it's less convincing...

[maze]

Me? Condescending?? Naw, can't be! Well... I'll give you that I'm often pretty wordy. I'm not as formal in person, really. I just find written language the easiest way for me to express myself (besides music, actually). And yes, INFps do tend to talk out of their ass... but we're often very convincing at it.

Maybe because I'm INFp...I notice the ass-talk so it's less convincing...

My ass-talk is purdy. It can gurgle loudly or it can come at you silently. Let us not doubt our ass-talk! It is full of...ahem....many truths. Yes, yes it is.

[Rocky]

*sigh*

You people are frustrating me here. Am I crazy and the only one who notices it?